A relook at some healing frames needed for objective health.

[0_The_F00l]

So I was playing an archon defense some time ago using jade.

She was performing well enough for damage, but one thing that stuck out was how effective her healing was.

She got a nearly dying operator up and running in a matter of seconds (I had a decent amount of strength buff but not half as much as a full strength wisp).

This got me in a rather foul mood , not because Jade is excellent all-round (haha punny). But cause there are specialised healing frames that can't do a fraction of that healing (haha more double meaning).

I think that (some) frames should change up their healing from a flat amount to a percentage amount (so as not to completely invalidate defense based missions) but still do acceptable healing.

[RLanzinger]

To @0_The_F00l : "But cause there are specialised healing frames that can't do a fraction of that healing"

Yep, that the point made by [DE] when nerfing healing after WISP.

The Correct answer to solve it is VAZARIN school as it give 4 instantaneous revives + 5s Immunity and 60% Healed over 5s.

It just Save my Absolute Sucking Skills the other day and the whole damn mission too... in arch-on and arch-median.

 

The Immunity from Damage and Status cleaning is the key component nowadays more than Healing part...

[0_The_F00l]

9 minutes ago, RLanzinger said:

To @0_The_F00l : "But cause there are specialised healing frames that can't do a fraction of that healing"

Yep, that the point made by [DE] when nerfing healing after WISP.

The Correct answer to solve it is VAZARIN school as it give 4 instantaneous revives + 5s Immunity and 60% Healed over 5s.

It just Save my Absolute Sucking Skills the other day and the whole damn mission too... in arch-on and arch-median.

 

The Immunity from Damage and Status cleaning is the key component nowadays more than Healing part...

I think you missed the point.

[RLanzinger]

@0_The_F00l : "I think you missed the point."

😋 : Not really, just got call during posting, so had to make it short

What I mean is :

• quick revive help mobile objective as you can get oneshoted easily during revive.
• Immunity when healing ONE target give you time to protect and prevent from healing going to waste.
• Vazarin is still the good way to do thing and a good model for what healing-frame lack.

 

The source of the problem with actual healing frame is also linked to :

• Status is very dominant and Status cleaning became prioritise since VORUNA.
• Immunity from Damage and status IE Invincibility / Evasion became the most common defense,
• ALWAYS MORE HEALTH with Inaros, Wisp or Arcane is the second most common defense,

 

To me "What Healing frame should get ?" :

• All healing frame should have ONE TARGET HEAL and Multiples TARGET HEAL
• ONE TARGET HEAL should be grant short duration (5s max) AND Immunity when healing. (Trinity 1^st Well of Life should be castable on ONE Ally).
• Multiples TARGET HEAL should be grant partial status cleaning (+50health give ~1-3 status stick removal).
• All bleed-out targets affected by a healing ability that do not grant revive should be grant quicker revive (-1s per ~100health until 1s is left).

[Xaero]

4 hours ago, 0_The_F00l said:

This got me in a rather foul mood , not because Jade is excellent all-round (haha punny). But cause there are specialised healing frames that can't do a fraction of that healing (haha more double meaning).

I bet they'll nerf Jade's objective healing capabilities, like they did once with every healer.

[0_The_F00l]

12 minutes ago, Xaero said:

I bet they'll nerf Jade's objective healing capabilities, like they did once with every healer.

This is the likely scenario , but if they dont , i would hope that they apply the same principles to some other frames.

[Nekomian]

4 hours ago, 0_The_F00l said:

I think that (some) frames should change up their healing from a flat amount to a percentage amount (so as not to completely invalidate defense based missions) but still do acceptable healing.

It's made me a bit frustrated ever since they changed up the defense objective healing and DR, in update 27.4 (5/1/2020); I get not wanting people to cheese objective defenses just fine, but making players need a chart on the wiki to determine if the ability works the same or is arbitrarily capped is a bit confusing. Like, some of the justifications were weird too, like blood alter not working for "flavor reasons" (why would flavor / lore influence game design balance and mechanics like this?), when magical void power dashes apparently heal just fine. Hilariously, I think Inaros of all frames before his rework could heal objectives the fastest specifically because he had no cap imposed on his kit, while others usually have soft caps of 50 or 100 HP per second (even when the objective has 100,000s of HP).

I'd love if they made healing % based on these, or just had less strict %-based caps instead (i.e. it can only heal a max of 5% every second), and impose them on the objective as a whole rather than fixed caps per ability (so all total heals from all abilities applied would not exceed that threshold). Otherwise players have to memorize a chart of things that do and don't work on the objective and how they're altered, even though the game doesn't detail this anywhere. It seems arbitrarily confusing, as opposed to just %-based total caps on the objective (one rule that applies to all abilities, rather than 20 different rules each per ability).

[trst]

I'd say just pull the mechanic entirely and make targets unaffected by abilities. It puts the defense frames back in their niche while eliminating any unintuitive interactions and exploitable effects in the future. Otherwise there'll just be more cases in the future of something that does/doesn't work when it seems it should be otherwise and cases of something being unintended or requiring a nerf. All in all creating fewer opportunities for issues to arise.